French researcher denied entry for a personal opinion on Trump administration (opens in new tab)

> We do not want to become that kind of scary country to travel to

It is too late for this. The common policy for researchers going to the US for conferences is to use a burner laptop with nothing but a PowerPoint file. That is the official requirements for public research institutions (which this person should have followed). Just like we do for China and we used to do for Russia. It does not make headlines every time, but a lot of us know a couple of people whose laptops were taken away for searching it. Personally I have also been using a burner phone for a few years (I should say that I had been, because all my scheduled trips to the US this year were cancelled).

> especially not the kind of shithole country where you have to be afraid not to offend dear leader

Before, providing social media handles was a nuisance (and I was never questioned about them). Now it’s scary.

Same for the questions about terrorism. It used to be funny and over the top, but if liking a post about Luigi Mangione is terrorism then it puts the whole thing in a quite different light.

Australian authorities will search your phone upon arrival if they believe it contains CSAM.

The search phones in Australia, they also absolutely do it in Europe. As in the U.S., not everyone is getting their devices searched. Travelers to Europe even get denied entry as well — but their home country’s foreign minister doesn’t typically get involved.

The UK will deny entry over social media posts.

Let’s just please be factual.

But this has already happened, is it not?

Killing is generally bad, but in some cases it can even be good. So, in absence of details what can you truly say about a killing?

We're not getting more information. Border police refuse to talk to the press or provide any information. Trump's border chief, who was Greg Abbott's Texas border czar, is known as secretive and has ignored public records requests from the press.

How do you know this?

edit: I see this has been now downvoted below zero, but the information posted here isn't in any of the official communications about it, so I think it's fair to ask where it came from, no?

Yeah I even see a lot of people within the U.S. refusing to travel to red states like Texas due to transgender rights or other non-progressive state laws.

The original French source says https://i.imgur.com/qR2RobE.png

It isn't enough for me to draw a conclusion, but it's enough for me to question this story which so far has only one side represented. If this comes down to the academic in question making social media posts that tripped FBI/Secret Service's "talking about killing the POTUS" or something similar, then yeah that's going to potentially raise flags at the border.

The rules don't change along with the president after all, just like people doing the same thing with Biden or Obama would have raised flags, this would too.

To be sure we'll have to wait and see the messages that are the focus of concern. What bothers me is that so many here are simply running with the headline and turning off their critical thinking because they (understandably) hate Trump's guts.

Newsweek, Scientist Banned From Entering US Over Opinions About Trump - Minister

https://www.newsweek.com/french-scientist-banned-us-entry-me...

> The arrest continues a reported trend of temporary visa holders and visitors being detained by U.S. border officials on their way into the country amid heightened immigration enforcement under the Trump administration and concerns that free speech is no longer a defense when it comes to legal immigration status. // [...] U.S. authorities saw these messages as "hate and conspiracy messages," which prompted an FBI investigation that was later dropped. However, the researcher was sent back to France. // CBP's move to deny entry to a foreign national seemingly solely based on their opinion of the president, rather than necessarily expressing ill will or intentions to harm him, comes amid increased scrutiny of those entering the country. // Legal permanent residents, along with those on work-based visas, have been questioned, detained and even removed from the country in recent weeks, including two German tourists and a Canadian woman trying to renew her visa at the southwest border. // Immigration attorneys have begun advising clients to ensure their social media profiles are free of criticism of the administration and images that could be seen as inappropriate or in support of ideas that do not fit with current U.S. foreign policy.

It's wrongthink, dude, details don't matter.

Thanks for the heads up! Sounds great

> when taxpayers over in America forgo all of that...

Are you really claiming that if the US stopped subsidizing security overseas, American voters and politicians would suddenly begin to support "free healthcare and college" in the US? Your claim is that it's a _budget issue_?

Citations needed.

I hope you're right, but the thing I find most distressing about what's happening is how many people are in favor of it. Protests are for converting popular support into official actions. Trump won about half the votes. He didn't seize power in a coup or by holding the legislature at gunpoint. The people gave it to him. Some of those people may have changed their minds since then, but it doesn't seem like there are very many of them.

The real problem isn't Trump, it's the huge number of Americans who think what's happening is great. I don't know how you fix that.

> Even fucking Putin isn’t really _this_ thin-skinned.

Are you kidding?

What's the rate of "accidental" defenestrations amongst billionaires in Russia?

One in ten or so?

What do you mean reign in? Last year they in a shocking overturn of centuries of political thought came to the finding that the presidential is immune from criminal prosecution for his acts as president and then offered no actual guidance on how to determine whether an act was "as president".

SCOTUS have no way of enforcing their rulings.

They already said he has total immunity for official acts. What are they going to do when they ask him to stop doing something and he doesn't? It's not like they can punish him for it.

I will seriously consider in the near future about withdrawing my future plans from the US if the SCOTUS do not show any backbone to this.

You ain't gonna be denied entry to Canada or the UK for calling Charles or his kids a cunt.

It is, and we are pretty close to the bottom. Civil liberties folks have been calling it out for decades. Congress has delegated far too much power to the President. Trump is testing and sometimes exceeding the boundaries of his power, but most of this stuff is legal. The executive shouldn't be able to unilaterally slap tariffs on things, but it can. The law should spell out the criteria for foreigners to be allowed to enter the country, but instead we give the executive total discretion, and the executive has granted the individual agents total discretion.

It was pretty clear for a long time that this stuff was ripe for abuse, and the President's own choices were the only thing preventing it from being abused more than it was.

Well, you put a fundamentally terrible* and vindictive person in that office, and surprise, he abuses this power. One of his first acts in office in 2017 was to abuse his ability to unilaterally dictate which foreigners are allowed to enter the country, no surprise it's even worse now. Despite this, there has been pretty much zero serious advocacy for restraining the power of the executive.

*All US presidents are terrible to some degree or another, but normally it's "I know what's best for the country and I'm willing to kill for it." Which isn't great, but it's better than this.

> Do people have experience traveling with burner phones to the US and how border control may treat them if they request them?

I used to do that and luckily they never asked to unlock them. What will happen now is anyone’s guess, but it is very difficult to imagine that the current shambles won’t embolden power-tripping border cops. There are reports of tourists being held in chains and being held in detention for days.

> I would be afraid to offer any more suspicion of hiding sth

So would I, which is why I won’t be going to the US anytime soon. It’ll be a shame not to see my American friends.

Border protection officers have always had a lot of power. Before, there was an understanding that they would behave sensibly and everything was predictable: if you had a visa or a waiver, you were in. Now, who can say?

I've heard that not having any social media or none with any activity, is a red flag that might get you denied entry as well.

Shit even this is downplaying how bad that is, and what a bad sign it is. This isn't deportation the way I think most people understand it, they weren't sent back to their original country or a place that recognizes them as nationals. The united states is selling people into slavery to an allied state.

Don't fight it ... it's going to be a handy precedent in 4 years time.

> If I'm not in front of a tribunal, formerly accused of committing/attempting to commit a crime, who are you to check my private chats?

CBP in the U.S. and equivalents pretty much everywhere deny foreigners the right to privacy. Heck, even in the U.S. the Fourth Amendment is taken to not apply at the border and ports of entry (and within 100 miles of any such, including the coasts!!). I too think that's quite a stretch, but that's how it is, and not just in the U.S.

I think there have been cases of CBP refusing entry to people who didn't even have smartphones with them.

So I agree that it is a privacy problem.

However given that we all have very little privacy when entering a country (even our own) the contents of this researcher's messages is relevant to deciding whether CBP acted reasonably even though we might say (I do) that CBP should never ask to see your communications without probable cause that you've committed or intend to commit a crime.

One advantage of being a US citizen. If I'm entering the country and they want to see my phone, I can tell them to get lost. Worst they can do to me is hold me briefly and confiscate my phone for a while. That would be annoying and costly but not a particularly big deal.

I can't do that when entering any other country, of course, but they seem to be much less likely to try it.

You realise its possible to black out everyones names? And if its a tweet, it can be deleted. Its important to see the facts here.

It seems like these comments could be released by a third party, the media, or the French government, without revealing the identity of the researcher.

Not sure how it works in the US but many countries can choose to deny entry for any reason and my understanding is they don't even need to provide a reason.

If that is the case here then I really doubt the researcher was told that they have been denied entry due to their personal opinions on the Trump administration. This really just leaves us to speculate.